Difference between revisions of "Roving wiretap"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(edit)
(top: Spelling/Grammar Check, typos fixed: poltical → political)
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
A '''roving wiretap''' is a warrant for a [[wiretap]] placed on a specific person rather than a "hardwire" tap on a specific phone. The term "wiretap" itself is obsolete and outdated, as the specific copper telephone lines have not themselves been "tapped" since the 1970s. So-called "wiretaps" have been done through switches and electronic radio intercepts for nearly 30s years.  Nonetheless, the language used in legislation and court rulings has not kept pace with technological change, and leaving much room for confusion and poltical demagoguery.
+
A '''roving wiretap''' is a warrant for a [[wiretap]] placed on a specific person rather than a "hardwire" tap on a specific phone. The term "wiretap" itself is obsolete and outdated, as the specific copper telephone lines have not themselves been "tapped" since the 1970s. So-called "wiretaps" have been done through switches and electronic radio intercepts for nearly 30s years.  Nonetheless, the language used in legislation and court rulings has not kept pace with technological change, and leaving much room for confusion and political demagoguery.
  
Wiretaps authorized on persons rather than the communications hardware are very useful for [[law enforcement]] when a suspect has easy access to various [[cell phone]]s, [[computer]]s, [[pay phone]]s, and private land lines. Before roving wiretaps, the [[Federal Bureau of Investigation|FBI]] would need to get a separate FISC ([[Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]]) warrant for each method of communication used by a terrorist. With roving wiretaps, the FBI only needs to get one warrant, and tap whatever line the suspect happens to be using at the time.<ref name="206derosa">DeRosa, Mary. “Section 206: Roving Surveillance Authority Under FISA: A Summary” (American Bar Association, 2005).  
+
Wiretaps authorized on persons rather than the communications hardware are very useful for [[law enforcement]] when a suspect has easy access to various [[cell phone]]s, [[computer]]s, [[pay phone]]s, and private land lines. Before roving wiretaps, the [[Federal Bureau of Investigation|FBI]] would need to get a separate FISC ([[Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court]]) warrant for each method of communication used by a terrorist. With roving wiretaps, the FBI only needs to get one warrant, and tap whatever line the suspect happens to be using at the time.<ref name="206derosa">DeRosa, Mary. “Section 206: Roving Surveillance Authority Under FISA: A Summary” (American Bar Association, 2005).</ref>
 +
 
 +
The FISA Act which created the FISA Court itself has become outmoded, the original intent directed against foreign [[nation state]]s, and did not adequately consider the national security threat coming from non-state actors, such as terrorist organizations.  Hence terrorists were able to exploit a loophole in the law.
  
 
The [[Patriot Act]] extended the use of roving wiretaps to include the investigation of [[terrorist]] activities.
 
The [[Patriot Act]] extended the use of roving wiretaps to include the investigation of [[terrorist]] activities.
 +
 +
==See also==
 +
* [[Surveillance]]
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
 
<references />
 
<references />
  
[[category:law]]
+
[[Category:Law]]
 +
[[Category:Espionage]]
 +
[[Category:Privacy]]
 +
[[Category:Fourth Amendment]]
 +
[[Category:Communication]]
 +
[[Category:Computer Security]]

Latest revision as of 09:35, 18 August 2016

A roving wiretap is a warrant for a wiretap placed on a specific person rather than a "hardwire" tap on a specific phone. The term "wiretap" itself is obsolete and outdated, as the specific copper telephone lines have not themselves been "tapped" since the 1970s. So-called "wiretaps" have been done through switches and electronic radio intercepts for nearly 30s years. Nonetheless, the language used in legislation and court rulings has not kept pace with technological change, and leaving much room for confusion and political demagoguery.

Wiretaps authorized on persons rather than the communications hardware are very useful for law enforcement when a suspect has easy access to various cell phones, computers, pay phones, and private land lines. Before roving wiretaps, the FBI would need to get a separate FISC (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court) warrant for each method of communication used by a terrorist. With roving wiretaps, the FBI only needs to get one warrant, and tap whatever line the suspect happens to be using at the time.[1]

The FISA Act which created the FISA Court itself has become outmoded, the original intent directed against foreign nation states, and did not adequately consider the national security threat coming from non-state actors, such as terrorist organizations. Hence terrorists were able to exploit a loophole in the law.

The Patriot Act extended the use of roving wiretaps to include the investigation of terrorist activities.

See also

References

  1. DeRosa, Mary. “Section 206: Roving Surveillance Authority Under FISA: A Summary” (American Bar Association, 2005).